Ex-CIA operative: We may need a new vote

Sadly if you believe that's the truth then you've been lied too, they still don't know who hacked the dnc, they "think" it was a Russian because of
the "software" that was used, there has been no proof of where the "hack" came from.

Even if the Hackers used proxies that went through Russian computers or using Russian made software that does not mean it was Russia.

If they knew who did it and had proof of who did it they(msm,cia,government) would show the evidence and not just say uhh yeah it was Russia fancy
bear and cozy bear were behind it. Yet give no information on who or what these "bears" are.

Obama says don't be ridiculous about Trump saying the election was being rigged, after Trump wins Obama says we have to have a full investigation yeah
ok, Hillary says no one should question the election until she lost and believe fake news and the Russians were the reason she lost.

Come on think for a second with your own mind.
The Russians hacked into the "paper ballots and paper scanning machines that probably are in no way connected to the actual internet" its ridiculous
its called fear mongering.

Putin doesn't hate America and its people, the us government hates Russia.

The man be damn straight. Check my user history. I was sayin it before, I'm sayin it again, the Russians are writ large all over the campaigns and
elections. Proving it so, however, at least to the 'unbiased' public's overall satisfaction, is never going to happen. What with so many layers of
compartmentalized plausible deniability inside another world power's intelligence infrastructur (note italics), not to mention (potentially)
gigantic, private botnets, ad-hoc hacker cadres and so on at their disposal -- cadres formed potentially out of very well-established criminal
networks with hacking HR in spades -- I wish our boys all the best proving it to the public. In private, I imagine it might be easier. THe thing to
remember -- as a self-reminder, at least -- is that, if all signs point to the Russians, then it is either (A) definitely not the Russians or (B) the
Russians playing coy with the assumption of their competitors (or antagonists, or enemies, etc.) anticipation of deduction (A). Better call John Nash
on the subspace horn...forgot how this one is supposed to be played....Speculatively, assuming (B) is the case, playing 'coy' as it were, then any
attention paid to it will be easily laughed off, because of the extreme ineffectualness of accusations to prove culpability (in another country, etc.,
as mentioned already). But if (A) were the case, say, the N. Koreans were the authors of interference and instead, have made it all look like the
russians, they could laugh it off for the same reason as the Russians in case (B). Ditto if it were China (my best guess) or Israel, Iran, etc. etc.
So in terms of smokescreen mirrors and debatable semiotics all thrown together, (B) I think is the best strategy overall, because it inculcates the
most ambiguity without any loss of plausible deniability. For now. The Russians won't every play it that way again...or will they?

Wow. It makes you wonder what exactly is all in the swamp. America is going to be hell of a ride next 4-8 years.

Hopefully for the better. There is some really bad stuff going on and I think what is really going on is if Hillary becomes president a lot of asses
are saved and new world order marches on. Meanwhile people are stepping up fight it and possibly civil war. If we allow Trump to drain the swamp and
free Assange could plunge us directly into that. People aren't ready to face their fears. If it's as bad as a lot of people say it is, Jesus.. our
entire establishment just got cut in half. We've been lied too for decades upon decades of pure evil.. not something most people are ready to accept.

If those 600,000 emails came out it would be a threat to National Security. Wonder why Trump has so many generals. What..500 emails came out and
person shot up freaking pizza place. People wonder why censorship and pardon on Hillary is needed.

Much weeping and gnashing of teeth! There's a higher level of influence that will put the kibosh on all of this horse 💩. More smoke and mirrors
from the establishment that'll fade in the rear-view mirror of history.
a reply to: Profusion

February 21, 1871 and the Forty-First Congress is in session. "Acts of the Forty-First Congress," Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62. On this
date in the history of our nation, Congress passed an Act titled: "An Act To Provide A Government for the District of Columbia." This is also known as
the "Act of 1871." What does this mean? Well, it means that Congress, under no constitutional authority to do so, created a separate form of
government for the District of Columbia, which is a ten mile square parcel of land.

We know that FancyBear and CozyBear did, indeed hack into the DNC. They are affiliated with GRU, Russia's CIA. GRU then gave those files they obtained
from the Fancy/Cozybear hackers to a 3rd party. That 3rd party (who the CIA has identified as known to work with Russian intelligence) to Wikileaks.

So, we know who hacked who...and we know who the files were given to, and how Wikileaks ended up with the files.

It's like sending your data through a proxy. The files were hacked by the Russian government, sent through a "proxy" to Wikileaks.

You do realize there is no evidence to prove this. And something many don't know is there is no way to prove this. See a cyber security firm cant
admit they have no way to confirm who hacked a server. So they look at patterns and say things like well this pattern fits this group. Problem is
hackers share information and even intrusion methods. this is the secret security companies don't want you to know. But lets examine the hack of the
DNC a minute. It was a cyber intelligence firm that made these accusations of Russian involvement. The DNC hired a company called Cloud strike to
determine who hacked there server. Now this company needed a fall guy cant get paid hundreds of thousands of dollars and go well we don't know. The
Russian narrative was all ready out there before they started. So how did they determine it was them simple they looked at hacks these individuals
claimed they done and compared it to how the hackers entered the DNC server. This they claimed showed a similar method but heres the problem there are
only so many ways to enter a server because they rely on exploits. Meaning specifically a coding error in a program that they can take advantage of.

So by this very nature relying on programming errors means hackers will always use similar methods. The process for attributing a cyber attack to a
person or group isn't a scientific method its an opinion nothing more. It goes something like this who has the ability to perform the hack in other
words the talent necessary. Where did it originate in this case it appears from a German server. Here the hack was claimed to come from Bundestag
according to german intelligence services made the claim it was the GRU. But as they say Houston we have a problem First no direct link has been
established to fancy bear group and the GRU. Obviously this cant be proved without acknowledgement from the hackers themselves or the state that
sponsors them. But lets assume they are at least associated with someone high up in the Kremlin. Then we have our next problem the IP address used was
176.31.112.10 according to vice as proof of Russian involvement. They identified this server as the command and control server used but has never
ever been used by Russian hackers prior to this. Hackers tend to favor certain servers that they find easy to breach to start there hacks. But this
server has never been connected to any Russian hackers or the GRU before this.

See for someone without a degree in computer science they will see these statements made by German intelligence as fact truth they are nothing more
than a guess that cloud strike used to back up there guess. There is no accurate way to tell contrary to all the movies we see exactly who performs a
hack. They cover there tracks Before a hacker uses a command and control server hes routed through dozens and dozens of other servers first.

So we have just guesses as to who leaked the information to wiki but we do have a statement from Wiki themselves who said it wasn't a Russian hacker.
For them to make this statement they would need to know who sent them the information. I'm assuming they have some kind of verification process that
they pass information through if only to maintain there reputation. I think the biggest clue was them offering a reward in the death of the DNC
staffer. Has wiki ever done this before and why would they care? Unless of course they felt responsible for his death than it makes perfect sense does
it not?

originally posted by: marg6043
February 21, 1871 and the Forty-First Congress is in session. "Acts of the Forty-First Congress," Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62. On this
date in the history of our nation, Congress passed an Act titled: "An Act To Provide A Government for the District of Columbia." This is also known as
the "Act of 1871." What does this mean? Well, it means that Congress, under no constitutional authority to do so, created a separate form of
government for the District of Columbia, which is a ten mile square parcel of land.

It contains practically no true information. Taking it a piece at a time:

Text claims: "Congress, under no constitutional authority to do so,"
Truth: Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution states:"The Congress shall have power [...] To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases
whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the
Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State
in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings; ..." (emphasis added)

Text claims: "created a separate form of government for the District of Columbia"

Truth: Congress created a legislature to encompass the entire District of Columbia. The governments of the cities of Washington, D.C. and Georgetown,
D.C. were withdrawn, and a new government created with representatives elected from Washington, Georgetown, and unincorporated Washington County. .

Text claims: "which is a ten mile square parcel of land"

Truth: The District of Columbia had not been square since the portion on the Virginia side of the Potomac River was ceded back to Virginia in 1846.
Since then, D.C. has been appx. 68.3 square miles, down from its original 100 square miles. .

Text claims: "In essence, this Act formed the corporation known as THE UNITED STATES."

Truth: In essence, this Act formed the municipal corporation known as the District of Columbia. .

What seems to be missing from all these accusations against Russia messing with the election, is what they are supposed to have done. Did they
magically change the votes everywhere so Trump would win? Did they use Voodoo magic? Did they use gypsy curses on Hillary?
These people who are supposed to be smart seem more to be imbeciles making these claims with no mechanism being cited or apparent in how Russia pulled
off this amazing magic act.

Public opinion is everything. You can seriously tank someone's campaign just by making accusations that have nothing to back them up.

You can steer the entire course of an election just by shilling twitter, Facebook and news comment sections. You can change the perceptions of people
by creating and posting fake memes and using armies of paid-for-trolls.

It's an information/dis-information war. Americans are being swept up into the largest social engineering psyop in her history, and they refuse to
even acknowledge it.

Sadly, Americans are happily jumping to the tune of a foreign power, wanting to believe it's their own, home-grown song.

If and it's a big if, that Russia is responsible for helping make it known how corrupt the DNC is, and Hillary, and lets forget for the moment about
the state dept releasing many of the emails under order that exposed her perjury and other lies, then all that Russia did doesn't count at all.
It doesn't count in changing an election because it exposes crimes by the Hillary campaign.

Exposing crimes and informing the American people of the truth releases any real or imagined third party from any element of changing the outcome
because of the exposure of crime.

The entire fiasco is a red herring to remove the guilt away from those responsible for their own loss because they are in fact guilty of criminal
collusion themselves to win their own election. Collusion with the MSM was exposed. The media helping Hillary with completely illegal means and aims.
So it doesn't matter one bit how we learned all this or that Hillary might have won if it hadn't been exposed.

If Russia hacked those emails which Assange says they didn't, then it is inadmissible as an excuse to change the current winner of the recent election
because of all that criminality and underhanded cheating on behalf of the Clinton campaign being exposed.
The Clinton campaign will first have to prove beyond any doubt that none of it is true, and then a Judge might have some meat to finally work with.
Either slander must first be proven, or it won't change anything.

Just don't be upset when things get even more interesting in a few months...

No. It wasn't foreign propaganda or a psyop that exposed HRC's corruption, and it wasn't a psyop that got people voting more for Trump.
Nice deflection though.
The real psyop and propaganda was what you are still believing that originated from the DNC and the cooperative media who attempted to shield the
corruption and colluded with that corruption in the DNC and Hillary Clinton herself.
The exposure of corruption is why Hillary lost. Not foreign propaganda, that is just hilarious.

Just don't be upset when things get even more interesting in a few months...

No. It wasn't foreign propaganda or a psyop that exposed HRC's corruption, and it wasn't a psyop that got people voting more for Trump.
Nice deflection though.
The real psyop and propaganda was what you are still believing that originated from the DNC and the cooperative media who attempted to shield the
corruption and colluded with that corruption in the DNC and Hillary Clinton herself.
The exposure of corruption is why Hillary lost. Not foreign propaganda, that is just hilarious.

I believe the hacking was just an excuse concocted after they realized there was a leak in the DNC. Point to prove my case is simple. They were hacked
not once but twice. Now what organization or company doesn't secure there network after hacking what do they do they hier a company. What does the DNC
do after they were hacked nothing they allow it to happen again. Then only after the second do the hier someone but then it is to investigate the
hack. Then Julian Assange so loved the DNC staffer he never met to offer a reward because we know how much he loved Hillary and the democrats. It
doesn't make sense does it?

But lets play a different scenario there is a leak at the DNC which went public to cover it up they say they were hacked. After going through there
people they think they found or couldn't find the leak.Then to there surprise it starts happening again of course the cover up continues and they say
oh we were hacked again. This time they find the leak. And of course mysteriously a DNC staffer dies well walking home in a wealthy neighborhood. The
claim Seth Rich's was an attempted robbery but nothing was taken. Then we have Julian Assange in an interview say there sources take risks then offers
money for information leading to the killer.

Yeah, I think they murdered Seth Rich, and he was the leaker, or a leaker. But since they can't blame him for it and point fingers at themselves they
blame it on Russia. The fact that there is no publicly known investigation into his murder is very alarming as well. Going back a long ways in
history, the DNC has been a very powerful and ruthless entity of players. The kind that think nothing of murdering people. Like a mafia.

The "greatest democracy on earth" reports about hacks, manipulations, maybe by the russians(how does a regime change taste if it hits yourself? xD).
And that´s not a reason, in an alleged democracy, for a re-elect?

Look at Austria. Only a simple suspicion of irregularities was needed and they re-elected, several times. Because it may be that the votings were not
100% right. In Cologne we had to postpone an election, because some names on the postal vote letters were written bigger than others.

And the US is coming up with a story that the POTUS elections were manipulated by the EVIL RUSSIANS(tm), but don´t see a reason for a re-elect? So,
everything is ok with that "democracy"?

And... Not that it would change something if another rich puppet would become POTUS after a re-elect. It´s war between the rich and the people,
started by the rich. And the people will lose everytime, if not the dictatorship of the rich is ended by the overwhelming majority of average
people.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.